Site Search Navigation

Site Navigation

Site Mobile Navigation

Answers From Tom Vanderbilt, Author of ‘Traffic’

By Azadeh Ensha August 19, 2008 8:37 amAugust 19, 2008 8:37 am

Tom Vanderbilt. (Kate Burton)

Last week, we solicited questions for Tom Vanderbilt, author of “Traffic: Why We Drive the Way We Do (And What It Says About Us).” And you chimed in with queries on everything from turn signals to stop-and-go traffic to honking and ants. We’d like to thank Tom for taking the time to answer these questions. We will be continuing the Ask feature, so feel free to leave suggestions for future Q&A subjects in the comments section below.

Q. Where did the yield sign go? Why have municipalities stopped using them? — Trevor Bainbridge

A. Well, in one sense, the yield sign hasn’t disappeared — its behavior has just been transferred over to the stop sign. Compliance at stop signs is notoriously low, and some 3,000 people a year are killed in “failure to yield right of way” type crashes at intersections with stop signs. But I’m not sure if or why municipalities have stopped using them.

Generally, for stop-sign intersections to be transferred to “yield control,” they have to meet a number of criteria, involving “sight distance,” daily average vehicle counts (intersections with low traffic are generally good candidates for yield, and as many places get more crowded that might explain their reduced usage) and crash histories. As converting to yield control has seen crashes go up (according to, for one, National Cooperative Highway Research Program Report 320) — possibly because of increased confusion of right-of-way decisions, among other things. And given that, based on the above numbers, a lot of stop sign intersections are plenty dangerous, I can see how local governments might be leery to changeover.

By the way, I’m totally in favor of yield control vis-a-vis roundabouts, which force drivers to slow and reduce the chance for a T-bone collision.

Q. The United States has very few traffic circles, or roundabouts, as they are known in the United Kingdom. Are there traffic flow benefits to using traffic circles, assuming we could somehow teach the population how they should be properly entered and exited? — Jeff Bean

A. Given that we actually invented the traffic circle, I think it’s high time we brought it back. But not the traffic circles of yore, but the modern roundabout — a totally different beast. There are absolutely traffic flow — and emissions — benefits to roundabouts (as well as the discussed safety benefits above). Research by Mandaville, et al., at Kansas State University has found that roundabouts can reduce average vehicle delay by 65 percent, and other research has found signalized intersections generate twice the emissions as those controlled by roundabouts.

There are a few reasons, but the most obvious is that a stopped vehicle generates on the order of seven times the emissions of a vehicle moving at 10 miles an hour. The idea that people would find it difficult to go slowly around a small circle with other cars raises questions about whether those people should be operating heavy machinery to begin with.

Q. In his book “Micromotives and Macrobehavior,” the Nobel-winning economist Thomas Schelling observed that many people caught in traffic jams do not view themselves as part of the problem. Did you rely on the work of economists in writing your book? — Gabe Nugent

A. Absolutely. It’s probably not surprising, because traffic is a perfect fit for economists, with concepts like incentives, equilibrium, etc., underlying and informing all kinds of traffic behavior, from the individual driver to larger networks. I talk about, for example, Arthur Cecil Pigou, who did groundbreaking work on the idea of taxing activities — like driving — that generate “negative externalities,” i.e., essentially the unpaid costs someone exacts on others for their activity. When we drive we aren’t charged (or at least adequately) for the emissions we’re spreading on people’s streets, the damage we do to the road, or the additional congestion we’re generating by our own driving, etc.

I talk about Sam Peltzman, whose famous “Peltzman effect” — the idea that increasing regulation of safety equipment hasn’t necessarily been accompanied by relevant increases in safety — has been much debated but is arguably correct in certain ways.

And I talk, of course, about Schelling, who famously used the example of rubbernecking to talk about the way our small individual actions can add up to colossal social effects — in this case, rubbernecking. Every driver takes their 10 seconds, adding to every other driver’s wait, and as every other driver approaches, they figure since they’ve already waited, they may as well take their 10 seconds too.

Q. After driving in Europe — mostly Germany — for a number of years, I’m convinced that most highway congestion problems in the United States are caused by failure to observe or enforce “keep to the right, pass only on left” laws. Traffic flows smoothly on autobahns because slow vehicles stay in the right lane. Faster drivers always have the right of way. It works beautifully! Your thoughts? — Fred Bothwell

A. The autobahn is tricky for direct comparison because a) there often is congestion; b) they have automated speed limits in some sections, so when traffic is forming all lanes are forced to slow; and c) there’s a much different vehicle mix — fewer drivers in general, and a richer driver population — including no trucks on Sunday. The roads, owing to higher taxes, are typically better maintained and suffer less from construction delays.

There’s also the obvious logical fallacy of worrying about “keep right” laws when the person concerned about such laws is violating the speed limit law by 15 m.p.h. or higher. Also, in heavy traffic, during which, incidentally, the left lane often clogs first, there’s a social question here: because the highway handles the most vehicles per hour at 55-60 m.p.h., why should a lane be given over to fewer drivers who want to go faster when that negatively affects the remaining flow? (echoes of the H.O.V. lane here).

That said, even for drivers going within relative bands of the speed limit, but with slightly different speeds, there’s a good logic to assigning some order to those speeds, in the same way there’s a logic to doing this on things like people movers on airports (one of my pet peeves is the “road hogs” who treat it like a place to stand, blocking all the “lanes”). But in traffic there are always weird exceptions, like an exit or entrance on the left, etc. There’s also the notion that someone is always going to want to go faster than someone else, so it raises the question of that one person’s desire is really equivalent to the cost of all the other people having to make lane changes, raising the crash risk for every other driver.

Q. In light of current gas prices and the likelihood of ongoing increases, do you think bringing back the 55 m.p.h. speed limit is a good idea? Do you think it feasible? — Stephen

A. As this debate could fill an entire book, I’ll just say if you’re interested in reducing fuel usage (and thus prices) and road casualties, it’s a good idea. On the feasibility question, I think we’d need much, much higher fuel prices, speed governors or I.S.A. (intelligent speed adaption) technology in cars, or automated speed camera rollouts. Appealing to people’s altruism or common sense (e.g., burning less fossil fuel) seems to fail as an abstract principle, in traffic as elsewhere.

Q. Mr. Vanderbilt, do you believe, as I do, that as many people enter their vehicles they feel they’re putting on a kind of “anti-civility suit” that somehow absolves them of all requirements to function as polite, humane participants in society? — Sixto Fernandez

A. By all means. Walt Disney got at this brilliantly in Motor Mania, the 1950 short that shows Goofy changing from “Mr. Walker” to “Mr. Wheeler.” I think the reasons are varied, ranging from the sensorial isolation of being in a car to lingering class issues to anonymity and lack of feedback or consequences for acting rudely in traffic, to the very stress of driving itself, amongst other things. Of course, some people simply act in the car like they do off-road. It’s been shown, for example, that people with more off-road criminal violations are more likely to commit on-road violations.

Q. “Ants obey traffic rules.” What does that mean? — Ipod Rod

A. Army ants traveling to and from food sources on their daily commutes (which change every day) seem to instinctively create lane systems for outbound and inbound traffic. A traffic sign in Bangalore, India, even gets at this, rather poetically. It reads: “When ants can obey laneing laws why can’t we the humans?” They also lay a variety of pheromones on the trails as they move, of course, and these are surprisingly complex, containing a variety of all kinds of, essentially, “traffic signals.”

Q. I travel all around the country and have become very conscious of the differences in honking behavior. In New York City, honking is rampant, especially among taxi drivers. On the West Coast, you can go all day without hearing a car horn. Why is that? — Harold Levine.

A. It’s a great question. One reason is, I think, the pace of life is simply faster in New York City. In his book “The Geography of Time,” Robert Levin conducted experiments among various cities in the United States, using a variety of measures, and found that New York ranked third in “overall pace,” while Los Angeles ranked 36. There does seem to be something to that “California lifestyle.”

It could also be that Californians are more anesthetized by being in their cars all day. I also think that New York City crams more people closer together, with more vehicles and more pedestrians (and thus more chances to honk) in a tighter space, one that has more traffic signals — and again, more chances to be delayed (particularly by distracted idiots on their cellphones).

As for taxi drivers, many of these have come from places, like Bangladesh, where honking is a much stronger cultural presence in everyday life, so it’s not hard to imagine they’ve carried some of that with them.

Q. Do ramp meters really work? Do they just divert traffic? Or is something else going on? — Erik Gunn

A. Ramp meters, from the research I’ve seen, do work, at least for the overall system (they may “punish” some individual drivers).

In Minneapolis a “ramp meter holiday” was declared at the behest of a state senator, who thought they were “causing congestion.” The Transportation Department found that traffic conditions worsened during the shutdown, so they were turned back on — and remain on.

Anyone who sends an email has experienced a form of ramp metering; there’s a “congestion window” that will basically hold up your email if the network is busy, as it’s been found that metering the oncoming flow is more efficient in the long run than simply dumping more information (or vehicles) onto the network routes.

Q. I’m wondering how long will it be, in your estimation, before we won’t drive at all? — Misha

A. Given the strides we’ve already made in semi-automation in cars, I think it may not be long at all before highway driving is largely taken away from the hands of humans. If you mean “before we won’t drive at all” in terms of even getting into a car, that future seems almost impossible for me to imagine. Though the examples of Denmark, with its high social happiness and incredibly high (and increasing) bicycle commuting, seem more sustainable long term than countries like China, which are going through the motorization phase the United States went through in the 1950s (with its attendant fatalities), and perhaps, having achieved this, will some day go back to the future, as it were, and lessen dependence on the private car.

I found Beijing, with its smog and super-blocks, its retrograde pedestrian tunnels and bridges, its epic commutes and hostile traffic and directionally challenged taxi drivers, one of the least pleasant large cities in which to get around (I did prefer the food there though!).

Q. Have you heard of any large scale projects or tests going on in the area of traffic-light timing? — Jonathan

A. Well, Los Angeles is always looking to expand and optimize its ATSAC system, which features real-time adaptive signals, and based on studies, have been able to squeeze more capacity out of their existing infrastructure. And a number of studies, for different systems in different places, having definitely seen reductions in travel times, delays, stops, etc. But there’s always cost issues (“smart” lights cost more) and the thorny question of “splits.” Everyone in one direction wants the “green wave,” but so do the other drivers approaching the intersection from different directions.

Intersections are finite resources; you can’t just give to one user without taking away from others. But we’ve all had the experience of waiting at particularly fruitless signals, which may be the result of traffic patterns having changed since the original signal timing plans were put in place. But I’ve been cautioned that, like medicine, adaptive signals need to be applied in the right cases — some intersections can be so saturated there wouldn’t be much improvement from the costly upgrade.

Of course, the most adaptive, most real-time intersection control out there is the yield-entry roundabout — and they work just fine when the power goes out!

Bring back traffic circles. Bring back traffic circles. Bring back traffic circles. They make sense. If Americans cannot “figure them out” then they shouldn’t be operating heavy equipment in the first place. Roundabouts are wonderful and make sense. I shudder to think that the average American is too dense to navigate them. But it wouldn’t surprise me.//swine.wordpress.com

I think the most important driving practice is maintaining a proper following distance. Not only in terms of not tailgating the driver in front of you, but also closing up a large gap with the vehicle in front of you. Gaps on the highway means the road is being under utilized and, at least in non-northeast parts of the country, drivers are perfectly happy to amble along in any lane with a huge stretch of open road in front of them while cars queue up behind.

Re Ants: ants obey laning laws and humans don’t because we are human, and they are ants. If the city of Bangalore would prefer that its population be insects, well, that’s a different sort of social statement.

Re Signal Synchronization: it exists in a lot of places, but: I used to drive in Renton, WA which at that time claimed to be the “Unsynchronized Traffic Light Capital of the World”. The city streets were posted at 30mph, but the lights were synchronized for an average speed of 26mph. If conditions permitted one to maintain an average of 26mph, one could sail right through the city without stopping. Trying for 30mpg guaranteed many stops.

Re Staying to the Right: Many places permit passing on the right under certain conditions (e.g. divided highway, two or more [travel lanes] in each direction). In these cases, it is better to drive on the left sometimes, as getting the inside lane on an uphill curve. In almost all cases, if the traffic will permit, it is better to use the whole road (in one’s intended direction) to follow the curve of least energy, than to slavishly stay in lane. One will use less fuel, travel fewer miles, and get to one’s destination faster. (This is true when practiced correctly even within one lane)

Re Roundabouts: proper design of the roundabout, including allowing adequate area for it, so that the curve is not too tight is important. So is educating
the drivers as to the rules. And for that matter, consistent rules and markings with traffic control
devices matter. In most cases, traffic flows counter-clockwise, and those entering the roundabout yield to those already in it, which makes the most sense, but is counter to the general rule to yield to traffic on the right. In some places,
though, those entering have right of way. This makes less sense, but is consistent with the general rule.

I lived in Pune, India and found their traffic behaviors both fascinating and entirely frustrating. As most people in cars learned to drive using motorcycles, the behavior of the average car driver was completely ill suited to their vehicle. Almost every day gridlock would result from a car driver scooting around to the front of a line of traffic waiting at a light. While they could gain advantage from this maneuver using a motorcycle, the same exercise in a car resulted in almost instant gridlock.

Interesting comment on honking in NY vs Minneapolis… as a transplanted New Yorker in Mpls, I guess I’d better lay off the “Yo!” honks before the other drivers escalate to actual guns. For what it’s worth, I think NY has a general civic sense of cooperation that is lacking in Minneapolis. Drivers here are often rude and selfish; I am routinely tailgated doing 10 mph over the limit, and I see someone run a red light every single day. But at least they’ve sensibly reinstated the ramp meters.

They recently added a roundabout in a first-ring southern suburb of Minneapolis. Drivers are so clearly flummoxed by it that the city has added orange flags to every single street sign related to the roundabout — which is a little like talking LOUDER to someone who doesn’t speak English.

I love roundies! In the cities where they use them, they work wonderfully. Minneapolis has a few, so does Omaha, and many of the East Coast cities have them, I’m told.

Americans can figure them out, and they’re much faster to get through than a traffic light. Even better, if some drunk hits it, it doesn’t take out the electricity for an entire block–just a bed of petunias. No wasted electricity, fewer traffic emissions, faster traffic, and less damage from traffic collisions.

Sydney, Australia has them everywhere, as do the British Isles. They’re marvelous.

I am in full agreement with question #4. The blatant disregard for the “keep to the right, pass only on left” rule by LLS (“left lane sleepers”) is probably responsible for majority of highway jams and lowering the highway throughput by about 30-40%. I too have driven in Europe for many years (not just Germany), and I have to say that traffic DOES flow better and more efficiently there simply because of incresed awareness and discipline about this very simple rule.

The answer Tom gave to the questioner was unsatisfying at best, and plainly ingorant, at worse. The prevalence of LLS in the US is causing major clustering of traffic where 30+ cars bunch up in a cluster, followed by an empty highway in front for about a couple of miles until the next 30+ car cluster appears. Driving through, and between such clusters is much more tiring for everyone. It is also MUCH more dangerous as average distances between cars is thus minimized, increasing the chances for a contact/accident, and as most cars in the cluster try to predict which lane is faster and find the best way to get out of it by veering between lanes AND cars.

This issue has frustrated me so much over the years, and I believe so strongly that it is causing so much social damage (delays, accidents, deaths) that I am considering starting a political party with LLS elimination being its single issue.

A message to all LLS: That car that’s been tailgating you for the past 5 minutes has nothing personal against you, and is not trying to prove anything. It’s just kindly asking you to move to the right so that the 30+ car cluster behind you can move on and use the empty highway ahead of you. That car that just passed you on your right, is also kindly suggesting you that there’s space to your right for you to use. If you’re driving the same speed or slower than the traffic to your right, please move to the right, and let faster traffic pass. And finally, the fact that you’re driving at the speed limit in the left lane does NOT give you the right to lecture, police, or block the cluster of cars that have apprently choosen to go faster than you.

I don’t see why properly timing traffic lights needs some high tech, high cost solution. I lived on the Grand Concourse in the Bronx, where lights were set in blocks, each spanning about 10 streets. All in a block were green for the time it took to traverse the block at the proper speed limit, then the next block of 10 streets went green. It worked the same in either direction. You had a red entering from a side street but once on the thoroughfare, it was green so long as you maintained speed and some bus didn’t block the way.

Another way to speed traffic: Remove construction barriers when there’s no work going on. Or vastly reduce the barriers to just around the work area. I ‘m sure we’ll all experienced a mile or more of lane reduction down to one guy with a shovel, or no work at all.

To keep traffic moving we need to re-educate drivers on how to guage slowdowns ahead of them and back off on the accelerator. Until I retired I drove 80 miles r/t per day in my Civic hybrid. I rarely exceeded 60mph and my average fuel economy was 56mpg. Because I would slow down in anticipation of traffic congestion ahead or traffic lights or several cars in front of me approaching a stop sign, I still have the original brakes at 110,000 miles. Of course, I often had folks come around from behind me and get in front of me because I was trying to be more efficient, hence the need for more REQUIRED driver education.
I’m convinced we would not only save fuel (and brakes) but we’d also keep our roadways moving at a more steady speed.

I’m convinced that most traffic congestion would be resolved if folks maintained a proper distance between themselves and the car in front of them. Tailgating is rampant, and it’s got to stop. Just like we Americans don’t know what a proper portion of food looks like, I fear that American drivers don’t know what a proper distance between cars looks like. On another note, I drive to work on a street that has timed traffic signals–if you drive the speed limit, you never have to touch your brakes. I take pride in passing drivers who speed up to the light and slam on their brakes. Will they ever learn?

“Idiots on cellphones”? Killers on cellphones is more like it. Of course, they are good for one thing: To summon help, assuming you’ve survived the accident that you caused by being on the phone in the first place. Hang up and drive!

When lived in Miami for a year in the late 70’s, I was surprised to see that the motor vehicle guide advised people to use their horn to warn other cars that were leaving their driveways, turning into traffic at intersections, etc. I suspect that’s been edited out now, but it would explain why there was so much honking in Miami, and maybe in other eastern cities there is residue of bad motor vehicle guide advice from the past.

Regarding the Minneapolis “ramp meter holiday, sure traffic moves slightly better when you park 50 cars on the ramp for the duration of rush hour. Meters are helpful when traffic is moderatly heavy and the meter interval is set to achieve optimal merging. In Minneapolis, there may be 20 seconds between cars which just causes cars to wait forever to get on the road.

I will have to resolve to buy Mr Vanderbilt’s book, if only to provide more real-life examples of the Prisoner’s Dilemma (whether to cooperate or defect). Regarding the “correct” behavior to use when confronted with a lane reduction in heavy traffic, Mr Vanderbilt was right in pointing out that it is rational (in terms of avoiding jam-ups) for all lanes to be employed to the fullest extent possible, saving merging to the last minute. We need to get over the idea that drivers are “defecting” if they use the empty, to-be-closed, lane. If everyone used all the lanes, there would be no “ahead” to jump to, and no one would feel cheated. The mystery to me is why so many dutifully line up far in advance of a lane-closure. I suspect it has to do with two fears: first, being thought of as a “defector” while passing others, and second, the fear of being punished for defecting by not being allowed to merge back into the pack.

I’m sure many jams are easy to analyze from a 10000-foot level, but drivers on the ground often have limited information on what’s going on ahead, and thus rely on social impulses to guide their behaviors. If for example there could be warning signs of lane blockages that encouraged drivers to use all lanes, perhaps that would give them the “permission” to defect by framing it as cooperation.

We have two traffic circles, or roundabouts, in Augusta, the Capital of Maine. I have driven them for 30 years, probably 50,000 times. Interestingly, in the Summer is when we have the most problems and accidents as all the out-of-staters come to visit, and are confused as to how to negotiate a traffic circle. Since much of our tourism is from states like Massachusetts you can imagine the difficulty.

Much of the problem stems from the fact that 30 years ago, in Massachusetts, the driver in the circle had to yield to drivers entering the circle, which is contrary to current law. You still find that Massachusetts drivers will obey this habit even though the law was changed decades ago. Whenever I go to Logan Airport in Boston, I navigate 2 large circles, where you have to watch carefully for drivers just bombing into the circle with no hesitation whatsoever. Amazing.

Unless we raise the drivers ed requirement, like they have in Germany, I fear we’ll never be able to improve driving behavior, stateside.

In Queens a “Stop Sign” means slow down a little and drive through. A red light means full stop, look for a cop and then go. Talking in a cell phone in busy areas is okay and on the BQE or the L.I. Expressway its okay to read, drink coffee and drive. Stopping in an intersection to decide which way you want to turn, blocking it for those behind, is okay until the horn blowing is furious. If you are on an expressway or parkway, and a car 200 feet ahead is signaling to change lane into your lane, you speed ahead as soon as you see the signal flash and get into his blind spot and then slow your horn and give the one finger salute. A parking space belongs to you if you saw it first, even if you have to back into an intersection and drive in reverse to get it. And if some is parking in it tell him that’s your parking space. If you see a parking space but you have to circle the block to get to it, tell your wife to stand in it and if anyone else tries to park, she’ll say the space is taken.
In Jackson Heights, Queens, enter a parking space front first.

To some, parking and traffic rules mean nothing. To others there is neither courtesy or reasonableness except what is owed to them. In some parts of the world there is an overriding contempt for rules and a selfishness and lack of respect for others that like in many areas abroad globalizes our driving experience and it is not by any means limited to people who have recently come here. In some respects, that’s what those pickup trucks used as cars and Hummers and Navigators are about. They say: get our of my way or else.

“In Minneapolis a ‘ramp meter holiday’ was declared at the behest of a state senator, who thought they were ‘causing congestion.’ The Transportation Department found that traffic conditions worsened during the shutdown, so they were turned back on — and remain on.”

I’ve never seen a ramp meter (that I can recall anyway) so the concept is pretty interesting.

But regarding that Minnesota study, it appeared that, in the aggregate, the estimated fuel saved during the decreased travel time did not make up for the fuel wasted during the wait time, correct? That, in fact, traffic congestion without the meters slows people down, and so long as everything doesn’t come to a stop, meters probably cost gasoline overall.

I think metering is a great idea — at least in theory. Maybe it can be a bit of a double-edged sword though. It seems revealing that in practice congestion might conceivably reduce gas prices as it prevents us from wasting as much as we would prefer to.

Concerning the comments on honking and driving styles between NYC and Minneapolis, I have to add that drivers in Minneapolis don’t honk nearly as much as those in NY. Honking is used sparingly and as Minnesotans don’t like confrontation of any sort, they’ll use it as a last resort to highlight someone’s atrocious driving.
Also, if you’re in the fast lane and someone is visibly going faster, the midwest way is to move to the slower, right lane. Ever drive through MN, WI, IN, IL, IA… If you get close to the car in front of you in the fast lane, 9 times out of 10, they’ll move out to let you go.

Overall drivers in Mpls. are courteous and extremely helpful, which some social scientists have attributed to the cold climate and perhaps the Scandanavian ethos that permeates the state (after all, MNsotans don’t think twice about helping someone out of a snowbank) So, I do beleive that there is in fact a stronger “civil sense of cooperation” than in NYS and definitely more than NYC.

I completely agree with you! I have nothing further to add because you said everything that was needed to be said.

One other thing. How hard is it for people to use turn signals? Are they really that hard for people to use? They’re there so people that are NOT in your car know what your intentions are. This way they can act accordingly and slow down or move out of the way. I had a co-worker tell me that she doesn’t use her turn signals because, “she knows where she’s going”. Really? What about the thousands of other people that follow you on a monthly basis? Shouldn’t you give them a heads up as to what you are doing? I just shook my head out of sheer disbelief. People like that should be off the roads.

A question: Do drivers who have just exited a freeway onto residential streets drive differently on the street than drivers who have been traveling on residential streets for a period of time – say, 10-15 minutes?

#3 – Rich:

Yes, honks in Minneapolis tend to be hostile. I don’t know why. I have noticed a lot more “impatient” behavior in the past few years on Minneapolis city streets, like passing on residential streets even if the car ahead is at the speed limit (generally 30 mph, or 25 mph on parkways). Nothing is gained, these cars are always just in front of you at the next stop.

Another thing I’ve noticed is that when traffic lights are out, the traffic at the intersection is quite orderly – drivers actually behave like they’re supposed to (at least so far as I’ve noticed).

I might qualify as a LLS, but there’s a reason. On a two lane per side limited access highway, if I get in the right lane near an entrance ramp for everyone who wants to go over speed x (60, 65, 70, you name it, there will be someone who wants to go faster), I am vulnerable to being picked off by the 50% or so of the driving popluation who don’t know how to merge – they don’t yield, they just come on in. Given the choice between having to slam on my brakes at high speed to avoid those idiots and being tailgated at high speed, I somehow think the latter is a little less unsafe. So what’s the answer?

What's Next

About

A team of New York Times contributors blogs about news, trends and all things automotive. Check back for insight, photos, reviews of cars and more. And remember to join the conversation — you can comment on the cars, offer your own reviews, and post questions in our reader comment area.

Archive

Recent Posts

The regular features of this blog, including Monday Motorsports, the Wheelies news briefs and reports on auto industry developments including vehicle recalls and technology updates, can now be found on the Automobiles Web page.Read more…

General Motors hasn’t offered a diesel passenger car since the diesel-powered Chevette chugged unceremoniously into its lineup in 1986. But the company is back with its efficient Chevrolet Cruze Turbo Diesel.Read more…